Monday, November 24, 2025

Trump Is Turning Gaza Into a Brutal Colonial Protection Racket


Trump’s ‘peace plan’ will never be meaningfully realized – and was never intended to be. It is simply a way to justify prolonging Gaza’s living hell

by  | Nov 25, 2025 | 

First published by Middle East Eye

The West has spent two years partnering Israel in its campaign of wanton destruction in Gaza. Now the United States – with the permission of a cowed United Nations Security Council – has appointed Donald Trump to preside over the ruins.

Like a Roman emperor, the US president will be able to dictate the fate of Gaza’s people with a simple gesture. Whatever he decides – whether the thumb turns up or down – it will be called “peace”.

Trump’s most likely side-kick in this depraved charade will be Tony Blair, the former British prime minister. He won his war-crime spurs more than 20 years ago, when he joined one of Trump’s predecessors, George W Bush, in launching an illegal invasion of Iraq and a subsequent, catastrophic occupation that left that country in ruins too.

Satire cannot do justice to this moment.

The eradication of Gaza could be achieved only with the complete hollowing out of international law – the legal global order that was established many decades ago to prevent a third world war and the horrors of the Holocaust.

Marking the demise of that era, the Security Council voted 13-0 this week to endorse Trump’s “peace plan” for Gaza, with only Russia and China daring to abstain.

The dissenting representatives of the crumbling legal order – from the judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to Francesca Albanese, the UN’s legal expert for the occupied territories – have been isolated, vilified and sanctioned by the Trump administration. No one appears to be willing to come to their defence.

Quite the contrary. Germany, whose own genocidal rampage across Europe more than 80 years ago once left it a pariah state and drove the creation of the new legal order, now confidently leads the way in flouting those very rules.

It has resumed supplying Israel with the weapons it needs to continue the slaughter, justifying the decision on the grounds that Israel is murdering fewer Palestinians during Trump’s duplicitous “ceasefire”.

On Wednesday, Israel broke the ceasefire once again, killing more than 30 people in a series of air strikes, including 20 women and children.

Even the current “peace” allows Israel to occupy some 58 percent of Gaza in a depopulated “Green Zone”, effectively partitioning the territory for the forseeable future. Daily, Israel bombs families sheltering in the wreckage of the enclave’s interior, declared a “Red Zone”. And Israel continues to block the entry of food and medicines, including the temporary housing needed as winter rains deluge the territory.

Is this what, 19 years ago, Condoleezza Rice, Bush’s secretary of state, meant when she spoke of the coming, painful “birth pangs of a new Middle East”?

Now, it seems, they have arrived in full force – and the region has never looked more terrifying.

A joint US-Israeli occupation

UN Resolution 2803 makes Trump the debauched feudal overlord of Gaza. His lackeys on a so-called “Board of Peace” will “include the most powerful and respected Leaders throughout the World”, according to the US President.

They will have sovereign power over the enclave’s ruins for at least the next two years – and undoubtedly long beyond that. The Board will decide how Gaza is governed, what constitutes its borders, how or whether it is rebuilt, and what economic life is permitted.

In effect, oversight of the system of colonial control and abuse Israel has exercised over the territory since the late 1960s – which the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled illegal last year – will be transferred to the United States, with the Security Council’s blessing.

This is now formally a joint US-Israeli occupation.

The US that now holds Gaza’s fate in its hands is the same US that has spent the past two years arming Israel.

Those weapons made possible the levelling of Gaza, the ethnic cleansing of 2 million people from their homes, and a mass slaughter identified by every major human rights group and international legal body as a genocide.

Trump’s “peace plan” is the international order’s equivalent of putting a convicted serial child abuser in charge of a primary school.

There will be no UN peacekeeping force in Gaza to try to protect its people. That would too readily expose the masquerade of Trump’s version of “peace”.

The UN force in Lebanon, Unifil, has reported thousands of Israeli violations of a supposed year-old “ceasefire” there. Israel is not just bombing Lebanese families, but this week shot at Unifil peacekeepers too.

Rather, the Board – meaning Trump and the Pentagon – will supervise an “International Stabilisation Force” (ISF) in Gaza, supposedly to be in place by January.

Disarming Hamas

Last year the ICJ ruled that Israel must end its occupation and pull out of all Palestinian territories “as rapidly as possible”, including Gaza. Apparently in line with that ruling, Britain and France led a handful of other western states in recognizing a Palestinian state a few months ago.

But in supporting UN Resolution 2308, both have, entirely predictably, reneged on their promise. Although at the insistence of Arab states, the resolution makes a vague nod to a possible “pathway” to statehood, the “Board of Peace” – that is, the US and Israel – gets to decide when, or if, that actually happens.

A precondition is that Mahmoud Abbas’ supine Palestinian Authority (PA) submits to an undefined “reform programme”. The PA already serves as Israel’s reliable security sub-contractor in the Occupied West Bank, having turned itself into a modern-day Vichy regime.

It was the PA’s endorsement of Trump’s “peace plan” that gave Russia and China the cover to abstain at the Security Council rather than scuttle the resolution with their vetoes.

The reality is that nothing the PA can do – even colluding in its own evisceration – will make Israel view it as a suitable Palestinian government. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyhau reiterated as much this week, shortly after the resolution was passed, saying he would never allow a Palestinian state.

Instead, Israel will simply stay on in Gaza. It is not required to withdraw until the multinational force is deployed and the Israeli military agrees that it has enforced “demilitarization milestones” in the enclave. Yet it is hard to imagine who will be willing to take on disarming Hamas.

Trump has ruled out deploying US soldiers or funding Gaza’s reconstruction. “The US has been very clear they want to set the vision and not pay for it,” a diplomatic source told the Guardian.

The US regional military command, CENTCOM, initially drew up plans for thousands of British, French and German soldiers to form the core of the ISF, according to documents seen by the paper. A source described the plans as “delusional”.

No European state will wish to risk its soldiers in the Gaza hellscape, caught between Hamas’ battle-hardened guerrilla fighters and an Israeli military continuing to treat much of the enclave as an effective free-fire zone.

Instead, the White House is reported to have approached Egypt, Indonesia, Azerbaijan, Qatar, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates.

But Arab and Muslim states, having already sickened their publics by mutely colluding in the genocide, are unlikely to want to be seen being dragged into disarming the only practical resistance to that genocide.

Astonishingly, it was left to Hamas to remind the world of what international law actually requires. In a statement after the UN vote, the group noted: “Assigning the international force [ISF] with tasks and roles inside the Gaza Strip, including disarming the resistance, strips it of its neutrality, and turns it into a party to the conflict in favour of the occupation.”

In the meantime, Israel will continue to fill the breach unhindered.

Ties to crime gangs

In fact, the ISF is a consolidation of Israel’s long-running campaign to oust the UN from any role in monitoring its illegal occupation of Palestine.

In that sense, it is a continuation of the same sham cooked up earlier this year by Israel and the US in establishing the “Gaza Humanitarian Foundation” (GHF). That “charity”, staffed by mercenaries, forcibly replaced UN aid agencies that for decades had been responsible for distributing food.

The Foundation’s handful of “aid hubs” rapidly became killing grounds, with starving Palestinians lured into these traps like mice seeking cheese. More than 2,600 desperate Palestinians were gunned down in its queues, and at least 19,000 wounded.

UG Solutions, the military subcontractor that supplied mercenaries for the GHF, is recruiting again – this time, one of its officials told Drop Site News, “in support of humanitarian aid delivery and possible technical assistance to the International Security [Stabilisation] Force”.

Previously, UG Solutions was found to have hired members of an anti-Muslim US biker gang to serve as security guards in Gaza.

The job of the ISF will not be to keep Israel’s genocidal army in check. It will be to “disarm” all Palestinian resistance to Israel’s continuing – and now Security Council-approved – illegal occupation of Gaza.

While the international community is dragooned into helping Israel crush resistance to its criminal occupation, Israel will be given cover to further cultivate ties to Palestinian crime gangs.

For the past year it has armed those gangs so they could steal the trickle of aid Israel allowed into Gaza. Israel then blamed Hamas for the thefts. This self-rationalizing narrative allowed Israel to conceal the fact it was the party responsible for depriving ordinary Palestinians of food, while also giving it a military pretext to refuse to allow in more aid.

This alliance will now grow more sophisticated. The gangs can be sheltered and trained inside the “Green Zone” before heading out on operations, backed by Israeli air power, into the ruins of the “Red Zone” to fight Hamas.

Hebrew media has already reported that the Israeli army has been “guarding” the gangs behind a “yellow line” separating the Green and Red Zones. Any other Palestinians who approach this cordon are shot on sight.

By looting aid from Gaza’s starving population, the gangs have proved they have no interest in protecting civilians – or any compunction about helping Israel to tear apart their own society.

There is already a model – if a failed one – for Israel to draw on. For years, until it was forced out in 2000, Israel protected Christian-led paramilitaries that helped enforce its illegal, brutal two-decade occupation of south Lebanon.

Behind the curtain

This week, hand-picked members of the media were given a peek behind the curtain to see who will be running Gaza.

The New York Timereported that a warehouse in the Israeli town of Kiryat Gat, north-east of Gaza, was serving as the headquarters of a new “Civil-Military Coordination Center”.

It is filled with Israeli, US and European military officials, Arab intelligence agents, diplomats and aid workers. There was, the paper noted, no one representing Palestinian interests.

The same building was used earlier to house the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the US and Israeli-backed mercenary group that pretended to be an aid agency until it was wound up last month.

The new centre is led by Aryeh Lightstone, who served in Trump’s first term under the then US ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, an outspoken, pro-Israel zealot whose main mission was to get the US embassy moved – in violation of international law – to the Israeli-occupied city of Jerusalem.

Lightstone is likely to emerge as the new Paul Bremer, the hugely unqualified US-appointed governor of Iraq following the illegal 2003 invasion.

Bremer gutted what was left of Iraqi national institutions and civil society after a US “shock and awe” bombing campaign. The resulting lawlessness made the Iraqi population prey to sectarian death squads, while US firms sought to plunder Iraq’s wealth.

The profits from untapped oil and gas now beckon off Gaza’s coast – a prize Palestinians have been denied for decades, not least by Blair when he served as the Quartet’s Middle East envoy. It is hard to imagine Trump will not now be eyeing Gaza’s riches.

So clueless are many of the center’s officials about Gaza that it had to hold a primer for newcomers on “What is Hamas?”, according to the New York Times.

To keep things light, each day is reportedly themed on one of the catastrophes facing the people of Gaza: “Wellness Wednesdays” deal with the issues thrown up by Israel’s eradication of hospitals and schools, while “Thirsty Thursdays” concern Israel’s destruction of the enclave’s water infrastructure.

Nowhere safe

Shortly before the UN vote, the Guardian reported that the US had decided only to rebuild in the “Green Zone”, the section of Gaza under Israeli control. The Red Zone is to be left in ruins for the time being.

A US official told the paper of the Gaza plan: “Ideally you would want to make it all whole, right? But that’s aspirational. It’s going to take some time. It’s not going to be easy.”

According to reports, the US will build what are to be called “alternative safe communities” – a polite way to refer to the construction of holding pens for Palestinians – in the areas under Israeli control. There is no indication yet that these will be permanent communities.

The Green Zone is where ISF troops will be stationed too, presumably alongside the Israeli military. They are expected to man crossing points along the yellow line, the death zone separating the Green and Red Zones.

“You’re not going to leave [the Green Zone],” a US official told the Guardian of the multinational force, in an all-too-obvious echo of US experiences in Iraq two decades ago. Then, the US had to build a giant garrison town in the center of Baghdad called the Green Zone, from which its soldiers rarely ventured unless on military operations.

Palestinians will supposedly be permitted into these “safe communities”, but only if they can prove they or their extended families have no connections to Hamas, Gaza’s government for nearly two decades. That will necessarily exclude large chunks of the population.

Everywhere else in Gaza will presumably remain “unsafe” – meaning Israel will have a free hand to bomb it, as now, under the pretext that these areas remain Hamas strongholds.

This will play to all of Israel’s devious strengths. It will pressure Palestinian families to serve as informers and collaborators to gain an exit from the Red Zone – replicating a system of control Israel has specialized in for decades.

In pre-genocide Gaza, Israel notoriously achieved the same by tapping phone calls and blackmailing anyone who had a secret – such as their sexual orientation, an affair, or mental health issues. Israeli authorities also often demanded collaboration before they would issue a medical travel permit out of Gaza for the sick or injured.

Its recruitment of informers is primarily designed to fragment Palestinian society, and spread distrust and discord.

Via a system of patronage and privilege, these new “safe communities” will also serve to further incentivize crime gangs to collude with Israel, helping it sustain a civil war in Gaza to make the territory permanently ungovernable – and justify Israel’s refusal to countenance Palestinian statehood.

In any other context, what all of this amounts to would be clear: a protection racket now headed by the US gangster-in-chief.

Living hell

The reality, however, is that Trump’s “peace plan” is never going to be meaningfully realized – and is not intended to be.

Gaza was already one of the most densely populated places on earth. How is its surviving population of two million or so to be crammed into half the space, with no homes and all its hospitals and schools either bombed into rubble or out of reach?

In truth, this is simply a way to justify prolonging a living hell for Gaza’s population under cover of a “peace plan”.

Israel had exhausted world sympathy to the point where western leaders’ complicity in the genocide had become too visible to conceal.

Now rather than having Israeli military officials on air spouting self-evident lies about only targeting Hamas fighters, we will have US officials explaining – with the help of far more savvy public relations teams – how they are struggling under insuperable odds to improve the situation of Palestinians.

Anyone refused entry into the Green Zone will be presented as Hamas or an ally of Hamas. Families in the Red Zone killed with US-supplied bombs will be terrorists by definition. The new “barbarians at the gate”.

The western media will finally be placated, as its genocide-complicit correspondents are ushered into Gaza – but only into the Green Zone. There, they will be guided around model “safe communities”, where they can busy themselves airing footage of afflicted Palestinians fleeing Hamas and offered respite.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of Palestinians will struggle to survive the winter without shelter and significant aid, with no hospitals and no schools for their children. All while being indiscriminately bombed by Israel.

This is the only “peace” Trump is offering.

Gaza Humanitarian Foundation ends controversial mission in Palestinian enclave

Gaza Humanitarian Foundation on Monday announced the end of its mission in the war-torn Palestinian enclave. The US- and Israeli-backed organisation controversially took over aid distribution at the height of Israel's military operation in Gaza blocking out traditional aid organisations including the UN.


Issued on: 24/11/2025 - 
By: FRANCE 24


Piles of humanitarian aid packages from GHF, Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, wait to be picked up on the Palestinian side of the Kerem Shalom crossing on Thursday, July 24, 2025. © Ohad Zwigenberg, AP

The US- and Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, set up to distribute aid to Gaza as an alternative to the United Nations but which Palestinians said endangered the lives of civilians as they tried to get food, said Monday it would shutter operations.

The company had already closed distribution sites after a US-brokered ceasefire took effect six weeks ago in Gaza. It announced Monday that it was permanently shutting down, claiming it had fulfilled its mission. “We have succeeded in our mission of showing there’s a better way to deliver aid to Gazans,” GHF director John Acree said in a statement.

The operations of the GHF were shrouded in secrecy during its short time in operation. Launched with US and Israeli backing as an alternative to the United Nations, the group never revealed its sources of funding and little about the armed contractors who operated the sites. It said its goal was to deliver aid to Gaza without it being diverted by Hamas.

Palestinians, aid workers and health officials have said the system forced aid-seekers to risk their lives to reach the sites by passing Israeli troops who secured the locations.


Soldiers often opened fire, killing hundreds, according to witnesses and videos posted to social media. The Israeli military says it only fired warning shots as a crowd-control measure or if its troops were in danger.


GHF said there was no violence in the aid sites themselves but acknowledged the potential dangers people faced when traveling to them on foot.

However, contractors working at the sites, backed by video accounts, said the American security guards fired live ammunition and stun grenades as hungry Palestinians scrambled for food.

Acree said that GHF would hand off its work to the US-led center in Israel overseeing the Gaza ceasefire, called the Civil-Military Coordination Center.

“GHF has been in talks with CMCC and international organisations now for weeks about the way forward and it’s clear they will be adopting and expanding the model GHF piloted,” he said.

GHF began operating in late May, after Israel had halted food deliveries to Gaza for three months, pushing the population towards famine.

Israel intended for the private contractor group to replace the UN food distribution system, claiming Hamas was diverting large amounts of aid. The UN denied the claims.

The UN opposed the creation of GHF, saying the system gave Israel control over food distribution and could force the displacement of Palestinians.

In the release, GHF said it had delivered over 3 million food boxes to Gaza, totalling 187 million meals.

(FRANCE 24 with AP)

Israel’s Slaughter of Journalists Can’t Go Unpunished


 November 21, 2025

Photograph by Nathaniel St. Clair

Israel’s killing of at least 225 Palestinian journalists since 7 October 2023 briefly attracted international attention after it was calculated that more journalists have died in Gaza than in the US Civil War, World Wars I and II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the wars in Yugoslavia in the 1990s and 2000s, and the post-9/11 war in Afghanistan combined.

As part of its effort to eliminate witnesses and control the narrative, Israel has, as one commentator wrote, transformed Gaza into journalism’s graveyard.

It has used drones to hunt down media workers from afar, such as when it targeted Al Jazeera reporter Anas al-Sharif alongside Mohammed Qreiqeh, Ibrahim Zaher, Mohammed Noufal, Moamen Aliwa and Mohammed al-Khalidi, in a tent housing journalists near al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza.

Israeli forces have also executed journalists at close range, such as when a sniper killed Saed Abu Nabhan in central Gaza’s Nuseirat area.

Many other journalists have been injured, detained or disappeared, while Israeli forces have systematically damaged or destroyed more than 100 governmental and non-governmental media institutions and offices, including television, satellite and radio stations; broadcasting towers; media service offices; and newspaper headquarters.

Assassinating journalists constitutes a war crime and crime against humanity, because under the laws of armed conflict, journalists are considered civilians, and it is thus illegal to deliberately target them. But journalists are not afforded any other special protections, despite the high risks associated with their job.

The drafters of these laws, most recently in formulating the 1977 additional protocols to the Geneva Conventions, recognised the difference between civilians and journalists, understanding that the latter are frequently present on the front lines; yet inexplicably, they failed to afford them any additional protections beyond those already bestowed upon civilians.

Western media bias

The limited legal protections afforded to journalists leave them exposed to Israel’s systematic targeting. Israel has been further emboldened by western media and the role it has played in undermining perceptions of Palestinian journalists’ professionalism and credibility.

Israel has a long history of defaming Palestinian journalists, even using the government’s advertising agency to produce YouTube ads claiming that reporters from Gaza are integral to “Hamas propaganda”, and are thus legitimate targets.

It is unclear whether such insidious campaigns have influenced western media outlets, or whether their own longstanding biases shape how they cover the assassinations of Palestinian journalists. Either way, they often repeat Israel’s fabrications.

When Israel killed Middle East Eye journalists Mohamed Salama and Ahmed Abu Aziz at Nasser Hospital – along with Reuters photojournalist Hussam al-Masri, and freelancers Moaz Abu Taha and Mariam Dagga, who had done work for the Associated Press – western news agencies whose own reporters were killed in the attack, repeated Israel’s claim that it had targeted a “Hamas camera”, thus casually associating the five slain journalists with Hamas.

The neologism “Hamas camera” was undoubtedly formulated by Israel, and yet scores of media outlets repeated it without pausing to ask what a “Hamas camera” – as opposed to a Nikon or Canon – might be. The mere repetition of the phrase helped to legitimise Israel’s deliberate attack on the journalists, carried out at a hospital complex where medical staff and patients were also killed.

This strike took place in late August, more than a year and 10 months into the genocide. By then, it was evident that Israel was methodologically targeting journalists, having already killed more than 200 media workers, often along with their families.

Moreover, it is highly unlikely that major western media outlets would have aped Israel’s legitimising narratives had white European journalists been killed on the rooftop of Nasser Hospital.

What is clear, as author Chris Hedges points out, is that such narratives “discredit the voices of the victims and exonerate the killers”, reinforcing the impunity that enables the continued targeting of Palestinian journalists.

Rhetoric of incitement

The accusation that Palestinian journalists are ideologically motivated and cannot be objective comes from media outlets that circulated insidious reports about beheaded babies and infants cooked in ovens. It comes from outlets that repeated lies about the existence of a command centre under al-Shifa Hospital, alongside the false accusation that Palestinian journalists directed Hamas rocket units from the rooftops of hospitals.

Indeed, dehumanising Palestinians helps to normalise not only genocide, but also the incitement to commit genocide that Israeli journalists have spewed from day one.

Already on 7 October 2023, Shimon Riklin from Channel 14 wrote that “Gaza has to be wiped off the face of the earth”, and later rhetorically asked: “Why exactly do we have an atomic bomb?”

A few days later, Naveh Dromi, who also worked for Channel 14 and is now an anchor on i24 News, rhetorically quipped on the television programme The Patriots: “There are no innocents,” adding that Palestinians “brought the Nakba on themselves” in 1948 and “now they will have a second, real Nakba, to finish [former Israeli Prime Minister David] Ben-Gurion’s work.”

Roy Sharon, a correspondent for Channel 11, explicitly justified the prospect of “a million bodies”, noting on social media: “I spoke about a million bodies not as a goal. I said that if, in order to finally eliminate the military capabilities of Hamas, including [Yahya] Sinwar and [Mohammed] Deif, we need a million bodies, then let there be a million bodies.”

Arnon Segal, who writes for the newspaper Makor Rishon, was not at all apologetic, publishing a map where he explained: “This is how we will return to Gaza: the full plan for destroying the enemy, liberating the Gaza Strip, and establishing Jewish cities there.”

In an interview for Walla, long-time journalist and presenter Yaron London repeated his earlier statements that “Gaza must be flattened, even at the cost of harming innocents,” adding: “If you cannot distinguish between the population and the authorities because the authorities deliberately hide in hospitals or monasteries, then you have no choice and must be much less ‘vegetarian’… In my view, we were very ‘vegetarian’… the punishment for Hamas’s provocations should have been much more severe. Unfortunately, that punishment must also fall on the population”.

Some Israeli journalists directly incited against their counterparts in Gaza. Hagai Segal, the former editor-in-chief of Makor Rishon, wrote: “All journalists in Gaza are Hamas operatives or supporters, fabricators of blood libels … Perhaps there are a few people in Gaza wearing PRESS vests who, in their hearts, somewhat disapprove of Hamas, but even they are not deserving of the journalists’ association’s protection.”

And i24 Arab affairs analyst Zvi Yehezkeli said: “If Israel has decided to eliminate the journalists, better late than never.”

Legal precedents 

Such statements could amount to direct and public incitement to commit genocide, an act punishable under Article 3 of the 1951 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. In a similar vein, Article 25 of the 1998 Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court provides that a person who “directly and publicly incites others to commit genocide” bears individual criminal responsibility.

There are precedents for holding Israeli journalists and other media outlets accountable for incitement. In the Nuremberg trials, German publicist Julius Streicher was found guilty in 1946 for inciting to exterminate Jews in his newspaper Der Sturmer.

Similarly, in 2003, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda convicted three media leaders for direct and public incitement to commit genocide. Speaking to the defendants, the chief justice explained that “without a firearm, machete or any physical weapon, you caused the death of thousands of innocent civilians”, while emphasising that their broadcasts and publications could not be protected under the right to freedom of expression.

Despite Israel’s attempt to cast Palestinian journalists as inciters to violence, the great and tragic irony, as the Rwanda case highlights, is that a not-insignificant number of Israeli journalists are guilty of precisely this crime.

It is therefore time for each and every signatory to the Geneva Conventions and the Genocide Convention to ensure that all journalists and media managers who have used the rhetoric of incitement are held accountable – by arresting them when they travel abroad and prosecuting them in national courts, which have universal jurisdiction.

What we have seen instead are numerous media outlets undermining the credibility of those who bear witness to Israel’s crimes – while, at times, facilitating the transformation of journalism into a vehicle that aids and abets genocide and crimes against humanity.

First published in Jacobin

Neve Gordon is a professor of human rights law at Queen Mary University of London and a fellow of the British Academy for the Social Sciences.

Muna Haddad is a Palestinian human rights lawyer and a PhD candidate in the School of Law at Queen Mary University of London.

ISRAEL BREAKS CEASFIRE, AGAIN

Hundreds attend funeral of Hezbollah top commander killed in Israeli strike

Hundreds of supporters on Monday joined a funeral procession for Hezbollah military chief Haytham Ali Tabatabai and other members of the militant group whom were killed by Israeli strikes on Beirut. Israel has escalated its attacks on Lebanon in recent weeks as Hezbollah has rejected the terms of a truce that call for the group to disarm.


Issued on: 24/11/2025 
By: FRANCE 24

An Israeli strike on Sunday killed Hezbollah's top military chief and four other members of the militant group. © Ibrahim Amro, AFP

Hezbollah held the funeral Monday for its top military chief and other members of the militant group a day after Israel killed them in a strike on Beirut's southern suburbs.

Haytham Ali Tabatabai is the most senior Hezbollah commander to be killed by Israel since a November 2024 ceasefire sought to end more than a year of hostilities between the two sides.

His assassination comes as Israel has escalated its attacks on Lebanon, with the United States increasing pressure on the Beirut government to disarm the Iran-backed Hezbollah.

Israel's military said Sunday it had "eliminated the terrorist Haytham Ali Tabatabai, Hezbollah's chief of general staff".

The group announced the deaths of Tabatabai and four other members in the attack.


In Beirut's southern suburbs, a densely populated area where Hezbollah holds sway, hundreds of supporters joined Monday's funeral procession for Tabatabai and two of his companions.

Hezbollah members in fatigues carried the coffins, draped in the group's yellow flags, to the sound of religious chants, an AFP correspondent said.

The crowd yelled slogans against Israel and America, while supporters carried portraits of the group's leaders and Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Hezbollah said Tabatabai assumed the role of military leader after the most recent war with Israel, which saw the group heavily weakened and senior commanders killed.

Israel has carried out near daily strikes on Lebanon despite the truce, usually saying it is targeting Hezbollah members and infrastructure to prevent the group from rearming.
'Very limited' options

According to the agreement, Hezbollah was to withdraw north of the Litani River, some 30 kilometres (20 miles) from the border with Israel, and to have its military infrastructure there dismantled.

Under a government-approved plan, Lebanon's army is to finish disarming Hezbollah in the area by year end, before tackling the rest of the country.

Hezbollah has rejected calls to disarm.

After Tabatabai's killing, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he would "not allow Hezbollah to rebuild its power" and urged Lebanon's government to "fulfil its commitment to disarm Hezbollah".

A source close to the group told AFP on condition of anonymity there were "two opinions within the group – those who wish to respond to the assassination and those who want to refrain from doing so – but the leadership tends to adopt the utmost forms of diplomacy at the present stage".

Last December, Hezbollah lost a key supply route through Syria with the fall of longtime ruler and ally Bashar al-Assad.

Washington is also demanding that Beirut cut off the group's funding from Iran, which slammed Sunday's killing as "cowardly".

Atlantic Council researcher Nicholas Blanford told AFP that "Hezbollah's options are very limited".

"Its support base is clamouring for revenge but if Hezbollah responds directly ... Israel will strike back very hard and no one in Lebanon will thank Hezbollah for that," he said.
Hezbollah defiance

Sunday's strike was the biggest blow to Hezbollah since the ceasefire "because of (Tabatabai's) seniority and the fact that it demonstrates the Israelis can still locate and target senior officials despite whatever protective measures Hezbollah is undertaking" since the war, Blanford added.

Senior Hezbollah official Ali Damush told the funeral that Tabatabai's killing aimed "to frighten and weaken (Hezbollah) into retreating ... surrendering, and submitting, but this goal will never be achieved".

Israel was "worried about Hezbollah's possible response – and should remain worried", he said, urging Lebanese authorities to "confront the aggression by all means ... and reject the pressures that seek to push Lebanon to comply with American dictates and Israeli conditions".

Lebanon's army says it is implementing its plan to disarm Hezbollah, but the United States and Israel have accused Lebanon's authorities of stalling.

Condemning the attack, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said Sunday that "the only way to consolidate stability" was through "extending the authority of the state over all its territory with its own forces, and enabling the Lebanese army to carry out its duties".

A Lebanese military official told AFP last week that US and Israeli demands to fully disarm Hezbollah by December 31 were "impossible" considering personnel and equipment shortages, expressing concern at the risk of confrontations with local communities that support the group.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)
Trump Called On to Secure Release of 16-Year-Old US Citizen Mohammed Ibrahim From Israeli Detention

“This is an American kid, so you would think that the United States government would be doing everything possible to secure his release,” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen.



16-year-old Mohammed Ibrahim, a Palestinian-American US citizen, has been detained in an Israeli prison since February 2025.
(Photo: @infinite_jaz/X)

Julia Conley
Nov 24, 2025
COMMON DREAMS


Democratic lawmakers are ramping up demands for the Trump administration to secure the release of 16-year-old Mohammed Ibrahim, a Florida resident and US citizen, who has been detained and reportedly abused in an Israeli prison for nine months—with Sen. Chris Van Hollen leading the latest call and expressing disbelief that the US has allowed the boy to suffer in jail while it continues to provide support to the country that’s detaining him.

“This is an American kid, so you would think that the United States government would be doing everything possible to secure his release,” said Van Hollen (D-Md.). “United States taxpayers provide billions of dollars to the [Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu government and the state of Israel. You would think that we would be able to get this American kid out of prison, certainly to make sure that he doesn’t get abused and beaten up in prison.”



Advocates Applaud as Pro-Palestinian Commentator Sami Hamdi Released by ICE

Ibrahim, a Palestinian-American, was arrested in February after Israeli authorities accused him of throwing rocks at settlers in illegal settlements in the West Bank, where he was vising family members with his parents. He was blindfolded and handcuffed in the middle of the night by authorities who took him to Megiddo prison, a facility known for “brutality and suffering.” He is now reportedly at Ofer prison, where he has had no contact with family members.

Van Hollen noted that Ibrahim has said he falsely confessed to throwing rocks after being beaten by Israeli soldiers.




Ibrahim’s family last week called for an independent medical expert to assess his condition after a consular official met with the boy and said he had lost weight and had “dark circles” under his eyes. The official told the family they had spoken to “multiple US and Israeli agencies” about the visit.

“This is the first time in nine months that they showed grave concern for his health, so how bad is it?” Ibrahim’s uncle, Zeyad Kadur, told Al Jazeera.

Last month, Defense for Children International - Palestine (DCIP) managed to interview Ibrahim and learned that he has been held in rooms with dozens of wother Palestinian children where there are “no heating or cooling systems” and where the detainees have faced at least one “scabies infestation.”

“The meals we receive are extremely insufficient,” he told DCIP. “For breakfast, we are served just three tiny pieces of bread along with a mere spoonful of labneh. At lunch, our portion is minimal, consisting of only half a small cup of undercooked, dry rice, a single sausage, and three small pieces of bread. Dinner is not provided, and we receive no fruit whatsoever. Occasionally, we might get a small cucumber and a tiny tomato with some meals, but this is not guaranteed.”

Ibrahim’s cousin, Sayfollah Musallet, was killed by Israeli settlers in July, in an attack that the family and Democratic lawmakers have called on the Trump administration to investigate. US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee took an unusually aggressive tone when he called Musallet’s killing a “murder” and a “criminal and terrorist act” and said Netanyahu’s government should open a probe into the killing, but the US has not gone further in demanding accountability.

Ibrahim had been set to appear in court on November 9, but the hearing date has been postponed to mid-December. Van Hollen led 27 Democratic lawmakers in writing to Secretary of State Marco Rubio last month, demanding that he push for the boy’s release ahead of a visit Rubio was making to Israel.

The State Department has said it is “tracking” Ibrahim’s case and working with the Israeli government on the matter.

But weeks after the Democrats sent their letter, on November 11, the Israeli Embassy wrote to a number of congressional offices, defending Ibrahim’s detention and describing medical treatment he has allegedly received while in detention—but not mentioning reports that Ibrahim has lost significant weight since being detained.

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) are among the lawmakers who have joined the latest call for Ibrahim’s release, with Merkley appealing directly to Rubio on Saturday.

“Secretary Rubio: Act NOW to free Mohammed Ibrahim—it’s your responsibility to protect American citizens,” said the senator on social media.

Last week, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) accused Israel of failing to live up to its obligations under the international Convention of the Rights of the Child by imprisoning Ibrahim—who’s just one of more than 300 Palestinian children in indefinite “administrative detention” in Israeli jails.



“It’s long past due that President [Donald] Trump, Secretary Rubio, Ambassador Huckabee do what we say is the number one responsibility of our embassies overseas, which is to protect American citizens,” said Van Hollen.

In Ibrahim’s home state of Florida, Democratic US Senate candidate Jennifer Jenkins said last week that Ibrahim’s case is “a matter of basic human rights.”

“He is a child from our community, and he deserves dignity, medical care, and to come home safely. This is not partisan,” said Jenkins. “As a mom and an advocate for our kids, I support the urgent calls for his release and urge Secretary Rubio to use every tool to bring Mohammed home.”

 

Australia’s Compulsory Voting System


Keeping it Dull


There has been an insufferable degree of smugness of late in the chatting classes about Australia’s electoral system. A special for Australian Broadcasting Corporation produced by veteran journalist Annabel Crabb has done much to swell the heads of officials, politicians and pundits. But the production called Civic Duty has to be seen alongside a general sense of puffed-up worth on Australia’s singular compulsory voting system. From the outset, the nature of the relationship between citizens (we might say subjects, given that Australia retains as its head of state the British monarch) and polity is made clear: you do not have a right to vote but an obligation to. Not doing so entails penalties and tribal disapproval.

Voting became compulsory through the Australian Commonwealth in 1924. The argument was a familiar one: people were simply not taking their electoral duties seriously enough. That voting was a right that might just as well be exercised by not voting was an argument few could fathom among the electoral moralists. With the gains of the Labour Party in the December 1903 elections, significant enough to eventually see them form a short-lived minority government, there was grumbling from the explorer turned politician Sir John Forrest. “What we have now,” he blustered in March 1904, “is government by minorities. The polling details of the December elections show that Australia is in the hands of minorities. That is all wrong.” As only majorities should rule, the electors had to be taught a lesson for their irresponsibility of choice. “If the people won’t use their voting privilege, then I think there should be compulsion.”

Dullness is the default position of the compulsory voting exercise, and pundits are delighted with that fact. Extremists, the colourful and the idiosyncratic are whittled down by forcing people to the ballot box. “Compulsory voting,” political theorist Anthoula Malkopoulou crows, “is known as the great leveller.” It also dilutes right-wing populism, which the author thinks most appropriate, implicitly suggesting that the left-wing variant might somehow survive. (It does not.) Compulsory voting is therefore “preventive in that it structures the socio-political space in a manner that reduces the appeal of populist claims.”

A superb example of this celebration of the dull and drab in politics is supplied by Nick Dyrenfurth, Executive Director of the John Curtin Research Centre, and co-author Tony Shields. From the outset, their prejudice is thickly displayed: compulsory voting prevents the likes of Donald Trump ever winning leadership, showing that democracy, if exercised correctly, can prevent certain types from getting in. This political illiteracy is accompanied by the erroneous presumption that compulsory voting somehow “ensures that government reflects the whole community, not just the loudest or the wealthiest.” The authors never stop to consider what that reflection entails.

What becomes clear is that gamey flavour in politics is not something Australian political strategists, representatives or planners can cope with. It’s far better to have that sort of pungency boiled down to something reliable, stable and tolerable. “Compulsory voting,” Dyrenfurth and Shields explain, “also keeps parties anchored to the centre. To win, you must persuade a majority of voters, not merely fire up your base. Voluntary systems reward polarisation, as parties chase intensity over breadth. Our system rewards persuasion and compromise.”

Not true: the system indulges apathy from both the politician and the voter, only suggesting persuasion towards an argument. Ask most voters turning up on election day (and those increasingly doing their pre-poll) and you are bound to find little “breath” in terms of argument. In many cases, you are lucky to find any argument at all. Politics remains the preserve and industry of a small, solipsistic community of parties whatever their stripe, and compulsory voting lends nothing to enlighten the general voter.

Which brings us then to the serious flaw in compulsory voting: that it never accounts for how informed the voter is. At polling booths and stations, the elector will encounter an avalanche of how-to-vote-cards explaining why the party or candidate wishes you to vote in a certain way. Given that Australia also has a preferential system, this can prove critical, as a candidate may well win on the voting preferences of other, more like-minded contenders.

All of this is mighty fine when it comes to process but does nothing to tease out how knowledgeable the voter is. Ask any cohort of university students if they understand how many chambers make up federal parliament, let alone how many seats they are in each, and you are greeted with the embarrassed silence of failed civic education. What comes to mind is a form of Pavlovian conditioning. Don’t go deeply into the reasons for engaging in a course of conduct: just do it. This sentiment is well exemplified by Louise Rugendyke of the Fairfax press: Australians don’t really want to see how the famed “democracy sausage” is made when they turn up to vote; they just want to eat the wretched thing, assume they have done their duty and “not think about it for another three years.”

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.comRead other articles by Binoy.

Energy Affordability+, Not Energy Dominance


Two of the most significant dates in my life as a progressive activist and organizer are April 4, 1968 and August of 2003. The 1968 date is the day Martin Luther King, Jr. was killed. His killing pushed me to finally do something about racial injustice and the Vietnam War rather than just reading and thinking about them.

August of 2023 was when there was a brutal heat wave in western Europe which led to 70,000 deaths, primarily of elders. This was my wakeup call as far as the climate crisis, leading to several months of book-reading to understand how bad things were, which led to a decision later that year to begin working on this issue. Ever since it has been at the top of my list as far as where I put my energies and time as an organizer: locally, statewide, regionally and nationally.

My primary focus on all those levels, since 2013, has been working and taking action to obstruct the buildout of fracked gas pipelines, gas compressor stations and Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) export terminals. That work quickly led me to learn about FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the most important federal agency that most US Americans have never heard of.

FERC is primarily the regulator of the US electrical grid. In 1977 when it was created by Congress, replacing the Federal Power Commission, it was also given the responsibility of regulating the methane gas industry, which in the 21st century has become primarily a fracked gas industry.

How have they “regulated” it? By giving the gas industry over 99% of the permits that they apply for to build new pipelines, compressor stations to push the gas along and import (in the past) and export (now) LNG terminals along US coastlines, primarily in Texas and Louisiana.

In 2020, a study done by the House of Representatives Oversight Committee, chaired by Representative Jamie Raskin, looked at FERC’s record between 2000 and 2020 and found that of the 1,027 applications to them by industry for permits, only six were denied. This is why the movement which has been fighting FERC and calling for it to be reformed, or replaced by a Federal Renewable Energy Commission, describes it as a rubber stamp agency.

For over 11 years a national organization, Beyond Extreme Energy, has been refusing to quit in its efforts to change this outrageous situation. For a while, from 2021 to 2023, under the leadership of then-FERC chairperson Richard Glick (no relation), actions were taken to make this happen. But when dirty-coal owner and Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee chairperson Joe Manchin ratcheted up his support for coal, oil and gas in March of 2022 and, in collaboration with Republicans and a few other Democratic Senators, attacked Glick very openly, these efforts were seriously undercut.

Now comes Trump. On his first day as President, January 20, he issued two Executive Orders to “streamline the permitting process for [fossil fuel] infrastructure projects” and declare a “national energy emergency.” The purpose: to set back the shift to solar and wind and accelerate new coal, oil and methane gas projects. FERC is central to this destructive plan.

Last month, on October 7, FERC issued a “final rule” to severely reduce the ability of affected landowners, communities and environmental organizations to legally challenge methane gas infrastructure projects FERC approves. The reason given for doing so was to “encourage the orderly development of plentiful supplies of natural gas. . . particularly the development of data centers to advance artificial intelligence.”

But there’s more. Three weeks ago former Republican Senator Rick Santorum called for the DC Circuit Federal Court of Appeals to be removed as the place where court challenges to FERC permits are heard and decided. The headline blared, “DC Circuit Court is blocking America’s energy dominance.”

Why this extreme call to action?

Over the last five years this court has made a number of decisions upholding the need for FERC to take seriously the rights of landowners fighting eminent domain for corporate gain, environmental justice (ej) and other communities opposing proposed new polluting gas pipelines and infrastructure projects, and those groups defending the earth’s ecosystems challenged by global heating.

Over the last 11 years climate justice activists have demonstrated at a big majority of the monthly meetings of the five FERC commissioners who are the decision-makers. 200 or more people have been physically removed from the meetings for speaking out—there is no public comment period—and permanently banned from ever going to this meeting again. For the last year and a half, led by Beyond Extreme Energy, every single meeting has been met with action outside and some kind of inside action.

The latest was this past week when a small group of us dressed up in black judges robes to underline the importance of continuing court oversight of this now-Trump-dominated agency. We will do so again at their next meeting on December 18 and keep taking action to shine as bright a spotlight as we can on this increasingly more well known but still dangerous, extremely dangerous, threat to ej communities and the world’s ecosystems. It is one important front of the battle to prevent climate catastrophe and shift rapidly off fossil fuels to the wind, solar, battery storage and energy conservation that our children and grandchildren desperately need.

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist and organizer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution, both available at https://pmpress.org. Read other articles by Ted, or visit Ted's website.